Talk:Toupee fallacy

	This logic related article has not received a brainstar for quality. Please consider expanding the article appropriately. See RationalWiki:Article rating for more information.

Possible duplication

I know I'm the one who suggested this article (good job, btw), but I was wondering if this one would be similar enough to Composition and division or spotlight fallacy to be mentioned in one of those. -- Seth Peck (talk) 19:17, 25 April 2012 (UTC)

I see the connection. How about just bung them on their respective "see also" lists for now? ^narchist 21:36, 25 April 2012 (UTC)

Done. -- Seth Peck (talk) 21:59, 25 April 2012 (UTC)

I kinda see it as a faulty generalization or generalization from limited evidence. sterile^{evolutionist story telling} 22:51, 25 April 2012 (UTC)

Sharpshooter Fallacy

Isn't the Toupee Fallacy just a specific example of a Sharpshooter Fallacy? 204.17.17.249 (talk) 18:44, 13 July 2012 (UTC)

I suppose they seem related in the world of fallacy taxonomy. ^bomination 21:08, 13 July 2012 (UTC)

Not always a fallacy

If I only see very fake looking toupees, and never see any toupees that look somewhat plausible (but still recognizably fake), then I can conclude that toupees all look very fake, by making a reasonable assumption that if there were non-fake looking toupees, there would be more somewhat plausible looking toupees. Dmytry (talk) 08:20, 26 August 2013 (UTC)

Very shaky reasoning. For one thing, "toupees that look somewhat plausible (but still recognizably fake)" are if anything more common than the "very fake looking" version. But even if we accept your premises, there's no reason to conclude that there must be some sort of even continuum of quality between "very fake" and "completely convincing". It may be that the market for toupees only really exists at both ends of the scale - cheap poor quality toupees for the gullible, and high quality expensive hyperrealistic toupees, with very little interest in the mid-priced but still sort of fake looking variants that fall in between. Ŵêâŝêîôîď^{Methinks it is a Weasel} 10:19, 26 August 2013 (UTC)

Well, it of course might be that there's no continuum at all, but that would be quite unlikely, especially as a toupee must also be put on correctly, etc. Toupees may be a bad example here. Let's consider fake videos from the 60s. Given that all videos from the time known to be fake are quite significantly fake, one can be reasonably skeptical that a forgery can be made good enough to fake the moon landing, even though of course the conspiracy theorists would be the first to bring up toupee fallacy and go on how you don't know of any other fake videos that didn't look fake, such as Kennedy assassination. Dmytry (talk) 19:00, 26 August 2013 (UTC)